Publication:
Endoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection with an external additional working channel (EMR+ and ESD+) are equivalent to using a double-channel endoscope: a systematic evaluation in a porcine ex vivo model

dc.bibliographiccitation.journalSurgical Endoscopy
dc.contributor.authorKnoop, Richard F.
dc.contributor.authorAmanzada, Ahmad
dc.contributor.authorPetzold, Golo
dc.contributor.authorEllenrieder, Volker
dc.contributor.authorEngelhardt, Michael
dc.contributor.authorNeesse, Albrecht
dc.contributor.authorBremer, Sebastian C. B.
dc.contributor.authorKunsch, Steffen
dc.date.accessioned2023-09-03T21:32:56Z
dc.date.available2023-09-03T21:32:56Z
dc.date.issued2023
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background and aims With an external additional working channel (AWC) endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) as well as endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) can be extended to techniques termed “EMR+” and “ESD+.” These novel techniques are systematically compared to EMR and ESD under the use of a double-channel endoscope (DC). Methods Our trial was conducted prospectively in a pre-clinical porcine animal model (EASIE-R simulator) with standardized gastric lesions measuring 3 or 4 cm. Results EMR+ and EMR DC showed both good results for 3 cm lesions with no adverse events and an en bloc resection rate of 73.33% (EMR+) and 60.00% (EMR DC, p  = 0.70). They came to their limits in 4 cm lesions with muscularis damages of 20.00% (EMR+), 13.33% (EMR DC, p  ≥ 0.99) and decreasing en bloc resection rates of 60.00% (EMR+) and 46.67% (EMR DC, p  = 0.72). ESD+ and ESD DC were both reliable concerning en bloc resection rates (100% in all groups) and adverse events (0.00% in 3 cm lesions, 12.50% muscularis damages in both ESD+ and ESD DC in 4 cm lesions). Resection time was slightly shorter in all groups with the AWC compared to DC although only reaching significance in 3 cm ESD lesions ( p  < 0.05*). Conclusions With the AWC, a standard endoscope can easily be transformed to double-channel functionality. We could show that EMR+ and ESD+ are non-inferior to EMR and ESD under the use of a double-channel endoscope. Consequently, the AWC presents an affordable alternative to a double-channel endoscope for both EMR and ESD.
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s00464-023-10295-4
dc.identifier.pii10295
dc.identifier.urihttps://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?gro-2/132217
dc.item.fulltextWith Fulltext
dc.language.isoen
dc.notes.internDOI-Import GROB-708
dc.notes.internGefördert über DFG OAPK
dc.relation.eissn1432-2218
dc.relation.issn0930-2794
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
dc.titleEndoscopic mucosal resection and endoscopic submucosal dissection with an external additional working channel (EMR+ and ESD+) are equivalent to using a double-channel endoscope: a systematic evaluation in a porcine ex vivo model
dc.typejournal_article
dc.type.internalPublicationyes
dspace.entity.typePublication

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
10.1007s00464-023-10295-4.pdf
Size:
1.43 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections